Not sure why you guys think her advice has no value on this forum?
I garee the majority here are most likely long past needing her advice, but surely there are younger members who could get a little value from some of her advice.
I'm sure many folks who read this forum could learn a thing or two from Suzie.
I just don't believe we should simply dismiss her, as she has done a lot of good.

We've had this discussion a number of times, and the consensus is that Suze does give good advice about getting out of debt.

My daughter's teen years were spent learning the rules to "Can I Afford It?", and she's heard "You are SO denied" many times. However the "How Am I Doing" segment has been a springboard for discussion. Even a teenager begins to question Suze's advice when she knows that both of her parents are retired and are still in their 40s, much less their 60s. I'm talking about the teenager's parents, not Suze's parents.

Suze just refuses to see the gray areas of early retirement, and she refuses to admit when she's ignorant. In her black & white world you're either 67 years old and living off the dividends (never touching the P-word) or you're dutifully slaving away in a corporate environment that is (for most people) a much different world than hers.

She's also destroyed her credibility by flogging cars for GM and with her debit card.

__________________*
*The book written on E-R.org, "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement", on sale now! For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
I don't spend much time here anymore, so please send me a PM. Thanks.

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

She's also destroyed her credibility by flogging cars for GM and with her debit card.

Since I don't follow her (though I've seen her on TV a few time), I wasn't aware of either. So I Googled, and read a little. Whoops, doesn't do much for her credibility.

Though it appears her very basic advice on debt and budgeting is very helpful to many people, sad but true. But anything beyond that like investing, retirement - the wheelhouse of this group, not so much...

I read one of her first books many years ago and thought it was pretty decent information at that time. Since then she has become more entertainment than anything and after all she is a fairly decent looking blonde in a black leather cat suit. Just too bad she bats for the home team, not that there is anything wrong with that.

I could care less what her predelictions are, but she is one of the scariest looking chicks I can think of. Up there with Grace Jones, IMO. Plus the advice she dispenses is alternately ignorant and embarassingly basic.

__________________
"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."

I could care less what her predelictions are, but she is one of the scariest looking chicks I can think of. Up there with Grace Jones, IMO. Plus the advice she dispenses is alternately ignorant and embarassingly basic.

Tango, sorry for jumping into the thread so late. But, I'm curious. How did you jump from the quoted statement above to the bolded statement below? The above statement just doesn't seem to drive your conclusion below.

My own opinion is that few should "assume" they can retire early. Tools like FireCalc and a decent understanding of everyday finances come into play.

I'm not familar with Orman's work, but based on the statement you quoted, I don't see a problem. Folks shouldn't just "assume" they can retire early. Her quote doesn't say that "no one should retire early."

Youbet, the way I interpreted was that she was saying under no circumstances should anyone retire. She didn't qualify it with "Unless you are one of the select few who has saved millions, live simply, have a great pension, etc." I do agree that the fast majority shouldn't assume they can retire early. But as you pointed out, she didn't then go the next step and point out that people can use something like FireCalc to go beyond the assumption and do the math....

__________________
ďIt is not a sign of good health to be well adjusted to a sick societyĒ.------Krishnamurti

Suze just refuses to see the gray areas of early retirement, and she refuses to admit when she's ignorant. In her black & white world you're either 67 years old and living off the dividends (never touching the P-word) or you're dutifully slaving away in a corporate environment that is (for most people) a much different world than hers.

She's also destroyed her credibility by flogging cars for GM and with her debit card.

1. Agree Suzie appears to be overly concerned with retirement and only sees black and white. However, in her defense, I've listened to some of her programs, and she is right, that many to the majority of us are not properly prepared for retirement..

2. Agree her debit card didn't go over so well.

3. I read the articles on the links you provided, and I'm not sure what this guy has against her. IMHO the titles are a little misleading. I just don't see why the first one has the title "Suze Ormanís debit card does not support the troops"? Maybe I missed something in the article about our troops? The same goes with "Suze Orman disrespects the military again"; again, maybe I missed something, but I didn't see any disrespect there, only her advice indicating she didn't think it was a prudent purchase. Mr. Nordman apparently doesn't agree with Suzie, but to sensationalize his titles is just as bad to me.

4. Maybe Suzie has lost her way lately, and she's far from perfect; but she's managed to privide many with some sound wisdom over her career.

Youbet, the way I interpreted was that she was saying under no circumstances should anyone retire. She didn't qualify it with "Unless you are one of the select few who has saved millions, live simply, have a great pension, etc." I do agree that the fast majority shouldn't assume they can retire early. But as you pointed out, she didn't then go the next step and point out that people can use something like FireCalc to go beyond the assumption and do the math....

As several have already mentioned, actually she did based on your OP:

Quote:

The second was "Under no circumstances should you assume you can afford to retire early. Stop working at 60 or so and your savings, social security, and pension may have to sustain you for 25 or 30 years."

3. I read the articles on the links you provided, and I'm not sure what this guy has against her. IMHO the titles are a little misleading. I just don't see why the first one has the title "Suze Ormanís debit card does not support the troops"? Maybe I missed something in the article about our troops? The same goes with "Suze Orman disrespects the military again"; again, maybe I missed something, but I didn't see any disrespect there, only her advice indicating she didn't think it was a prudent purchase. Mr. Nordman apparently doesn't agree with Suzie, but to sensationalize his titles is just as bad to me.

Maybe I'm missing the irony/sarcasm, but you realize that I am "this guy" you're referring to?

Her debit card (with its fees) doesn't support anyone-- especially not the unbanked-- including the troops. "Support" would be having the card pay its expenses from advertising, or donating the profits to some worthy cause. But admonishing people that her product is good for them, and then charging for it, and then calling her critics "idiots"... I'm not feelin' the love there.

As for the disrespect, that's why I included the transcript. She missed a valuable opportunity to discuss military benefits with her audience. Would you like to be spoken to that way in a private conversation, let alone on national TV?

__________________*
*The book written on E-R.org, "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement", on sale now! For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
I don't spend much time here anymore, so please send me a PM. Thanks.

Maybe I'm missing the irony/sarcasm, but you realize that I am "this guy" you're referring to?

Her debit card (with its fees) doesn't support anyone-- especially not the unbanked-- including the troops. "Support" would be having the card pay its expenses from advertising, or donating the profits to some worthy cause. But admonishing people that her product is good for them, and then charging for it, and then calling her critics "idiots"... I'm not feelin' the love there.

As for the disrespect, that's why I included the transcript. She missed a valuable opportunity to discuss military benefits with her audience. Would you like to be spoken to that way in a private conversation, let alone on national TV?

No irony or sarcasm intended, as i did not associate you as being the one who wrote the articles.

I was only saying your titles are a little misleading. I agree her card with the fees doesn't really support anyone but her. however, the title didn't say that; it said not supporting the soldiers, which leads one to perceive the card was geared towards ripping off our troops only.

Again, from reading the transcript, I do not see any intended disrespect towards our troops. I do agree she should have been a little more up to speed on military pensions, but just because she wasnt doesn't imply disrespect, and leading one to believe that is disrespect is not right either. I also did not think that transcript differed from the way she has talked to other folks on her program; is she a little pushy- no doubt about it, but i do not think she is disrespectful. I did pick up her concern for the future of the pension, I think she was indicating the COLA formula could change or there could be annual freezes, which would maybe not allow the pension to keep up with inflation.

To answer a few who questioned why I watch, I thought it was clear - I only watch for the Can I Afford It and How Am I Doing segments and I FF through the rest of the show. The former is amusing, how clueless so many callers are when they're up to their eyeballs in debt, have zero savings, are in their 40's or 50's and want to blow a huge sum on something frivolous. The latter I like because I like seeing how well prepared people are for retirement and I gauge them against where I was at their age. I did not even bother to record the show last night.

To answer a few who questioned why I watch, I thought it was clear - I only watch for the Can I Afford It and How Am I Doing segments and I FF through the rest of the show. The former is amusing, how clueless so many callers are when they're up to their eyeballs in debt, have zero savings, are in their 40's or 50's and want to blow a huge sum on something frivolous. The latter I like because I like seeing how well prepared people are for retirement and I gauge them against where I was at their age. I did not even bother to record the show last night.

I rarely watch Suze but those two segments are the only ones I care to watch, too, and for the same reasons you stated.

__________________
Retired in late 2008 at age 45. Cashed in company stock, bought a lot of shares in a big bond fund and am living nicely off its dividends. IRA, SS, and a pension await me at age 60 and later. No kids, no debts.

This was probably 10 years ago, but she told a 50ish something woman who was lending to her 30 something kids -- "if they drive a car nicer than yours -you shouldn't be lending to them" That has stuck with me and helped me get my mom out of a bad situation with my brother......

Not having cable, i am unfamiliar with Suze Orman's program. By most accounts she seems rather off putting (the use of the words and phrases "girlfriend", "DE-nied" and "ain't happening" as quoted in Nord's article is enough to persuade me that I'm not missing anything worthwhile).

FWIW, I agree with her strategy - as summarized on this thread - of living off dividends and not touching principal. But that is not the ONLY approach to retirement planning, and one size can never fit all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by marc515

IMHO the titles are a little misleading. I just don't see why the first one has the title "Suze Ormans debit card does not support the troops"? Maybe I missed something in the article about our troops? The same goes with "Suze Orman disrespects the military again"; again, maybe I missed something, but I didn't see any disrespect there, only her advice indicating she didn't think it was a prudent purchase. Mr. Nordman apparently doesn't agree with Suzie, but to sensationalize his titles is just as bad to me.

I read the articles. I too did not see any explicit or implicit disrespect for the military in the summary given of her advice to the retired woman. Similarly, it was unclear that she has suggested that the debit card product she sells is especially valuable or appropriate for service personnel; so accusing it of "not supporting the troops" seems over the top (a bit like claiming "Suze Orman's debit card does not support the fight against world hunger": technically true, but so what).

Poor choice of titles, but it is Nord's blog so he doesn't have to please anyone but himself. No harm done, I suspect.

__________________

__________________
"To know what you prefer, instead of humbly saying Amen to what the world tells you you ought to prefer, is to have kept your soul alive". Robert Louis Stevenson, An Inland Voyage (1878)

Latest Threads

Social Knowledge Community

About Us

This community was started in 2002 as an alternative to a then fee only Motley Fool. The focus of the discussions is on topics related to early retirement and financial independence. The community is moderated to ensure a pleasant experience for our members.